Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 .. 17 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 21 post(s) |
suid0
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
131
|
Posted - 2014.06.02 13:13:00 -
[391] - Quote
Gliese Casserres wrote:Bael Gar wrote:If we are no longer allowed to research BPO from station hangar, how we are supposed to use ALLIANCE laboratories ??
Before KRONOS we could use any laboratory belongs to any corporation in alliance to start research job, while BPO was in corporate hangar at station. But after KRONOS we cannot start job from station and cannot put BPO into other corporation laboratory. It seems CCP removed very useful functionality from the game.
Indeed this feature has been the only thing allowing me to pursue industry gameplay in my one man corp. Can't afford to purchase, babysit, nor lose my own POS isk and time -wise, so I bought a lab for alliance pos and pay my share of fuel. All works well and everyone is happy. Now if said functionality is removed I face 3 options: 1) dismantle the whole corp and join a bigger one 2) put up my own pos and wait for player generated content 3) say **** it to industry and put characters to orbit the beacon for candy. Removing this functionality drives the sandbox even more to the direction of big corporations, generates more opportunities for infiltrators. Or if small corps choose to persist, expose themselves more to the wardec content and inevitable swarms of marauders tearing down your pos for lols when you chose to go out during weekend rather than dismantling your pos just in case. TL;DR Dev's are pissing to my corner of the sandbox and I don't like it. I'm too poor for own pos, and too non-committed to defend one against merc marauder swarm. Allow POS BPO research from stations in the future.
Given anchoring mechanics are changing to remove the standings requirements, also if war dec'd you have 24 hrs to just pull your equipment down if you don't want to defend it with 0 loss there shouldn't really be the need to use an alliance pos.
If you don't want to put the BPO in a tower, just make use of station slots instead? the entire enemy support fleet is dead except for one interdictor a titan could easily finish off with drones -á--áCommander Ted |
|
CCP Ytterbium
C C P C C P Alliance
3547
|
Posted - 2014.06.02 13:21:00 -
[392] - Quote
Erasmus Phoenix wrote:Is the anchoring IV for starbase defense management thing still happening? Can't find it in the patch notes.
It's not for Kronos, this will go live with the main bulk of the industry changes after that. |
|
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective
1195
|
Posted - 2014.06.02 16:59:00 -
[393] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Erasmus Phoenix wrote:Is the anchoring IV for starbase defense management thing still happening? Can't find it in the patch notes. It's not for Kronos, this will go live with the main bulk of the industry changes after that.
Why is that? I mean okay its POSes and POSes can be used for industry, but POS defense happen in a lot of situations, and I bet that in most cases its not to defend an industry POS.
I could transport blueprints in my dramiel, its an industry activity. Does this mean that we would need to delay pirate faction rebalance to crius aswell?
Being able to POS gun with anchoring IV is in my opinion a change that does not need to wait six more weeks before being implemented. Its not like ship balancing or something, six more weeks of discussing with the community won't change much :D You can't end up having the skill requiring level 4.25, it would either be 5 or 4. Signature Tanking - Best Tanking. Beware the french guy!
|
Gliese Casserres
Confused Bunnies Inc CAStabouts
6
|
Posted - 2014.06.02 17:03:00 -
[394] - Quote
suid0 wrote:Gliese Casserres wrote:Bael Gar wrote:If we are no longer allowed to research BPO from station hangar, how we are supposed to use ALLIANCE laboratories ??
Before KRONOS we could use any laboratory belongs to any corporation in alliance to start research job, while BPO was in corporate hangar at station. But after KRONOS we cannot start job from station and cannot put BPO into other corporation laboratory. It seems CCP removed very useful functionality from the game.
Indeed this feature has been the only thing allowing me to pursue industry gameplay in my one man corp. Can't afford to purchase, babysit, nor lose my own POS isk and time -wise, so I bought a lab for alliance pos and pay my share of fuel. All works well and everyone is happy. Now if said functionality is removed I face 3 options: 1) dismantle the whole corp and join a bigger one 2) put up my own pos and wait for player generated content 3) say **** it to industry and put characters to orbit the beacon for candy. Removing this functionality drives the sandbox even more to the direction of big corporations, generates more opportunities for infiltrators. Or if small corps choose to persist, expose themselves more to the wardec content and inevitable swarms of marauders tearing down your pos for lols when you chose to go out during weekend rather than dismantling your pos just in case. TL;DR Dev's are pissing to my corner of the sandbox and I don't like it. I'm too poor for own pos, and too non-committed to defend one against merc marauder swarm. Allow POS BPO research from stations in the future. Given anchoring mechanics are changing to remove the standings requirements, also if war dec'd you have 24 hrs to just pull your equipment down if you don't want to defend it with 0 loss there shouldn't really be the need to use an alliance pos. If you don't want to put the BPO in a tower, just make use of station slots instead? I'd still rather pay someone else to carry the burden which a POS is. (Yes, I want to reap the benefits of a POS without owning and maintainaing it.) And, as is widely known, station slots are even more pain in the backside than anything. Current system is much more convenient and I can actually have few days off at a moments notice if I so please.
|
Veinnail
FinFleet Northern Coalition.
86
|
Posted - 2014.06.02 17:12:00 -
[395] - Quote
I am a bit curious how this works into the lore. In the eve universe we can utilize technology like cloning and jump cloning, but we cannot refer a database remotely in order to access schematics that are available to our corporation?
I still feel like remote usage of information fits into the entire concept that Eve's galaxy plays into.
|
Joraa Starkmanir
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
5
|
Posted - 2014.06.03 21:20:00 -
[396] - Quote
Veinnail wrote:I am a bit curious how this works into the lore. In the eve universe we can utilize technology like cloning and jump cloning, but we cannot refer a database remotely in order to access schematics that are available to our corporation?
I still feel like remote usage of information fits into the entire concept that Eve's galaxy plays into.
Easy lore reason: Giving workforce access to your hangars remotely are 99% likely to result in theft of everythign nto nailed down, while with local access it can be controlled who takes what and where. Due to the high number of thefts, Concord have passed universal laws against giving workforces remote access to anything.
Took like 10sec to make up this BS, lore is just a small part tho mostly its gameplay reasons. Risk-reward is totaly screwed when you can have your BPO's safe in station and still get the benefits of a POS. |
Kusum Fawn
State Protectorate Caldari State
474
|
Posted - 2014.06.04 23:00:00 -
[397] - Quote
Joraa Starkmanir wrote:Veinnail wrote:I am a bit curious how this works into the lore. In the eve universe we can utilize technology like cloning and jump cloning, but we cannot refer a database remotely in order to access schematics that are available to our corporation?
I still feel like remote usage of information fits into the entire concept that Eve's galaxy plays into.
Easy lore reason: Giving workforce access to your hangars remotely are 99% likely to result in theft of everythign nto nailed down, while with local access it can be controlled who takes what and where. Due to the high number of thefts, Concord have passed universal laws against giving workforces remote access to anything. Took like 10sec to make up this BS, lore is just a small part tho mostly its gameplay reasons. Risk-reward is totaly screwed when you can have your BPO's safe in station and still get the benefits of a POS.
Except that contracts and PI as well as buy orders and even other industry job actions can be done remotely. There is nothing that makes it, even in your 10sec lore bs, consistant with the rest of the game. Its not possible to please all the people all the time, but it sure as hell is possible to Displease all the people, most of the time.
|
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
3378
|
Posted - 2014.06.05 00:10:00 -
[398] - Quote
Kusum Fawn wrote:Joraa Starkmanir wrote:Veinnail wrote:I am a bit curious how this works into the lore. In the eve universe we can utilize technology like cloning and jump cloning, but we cannot refer a database remotely in order to access schematics that are available to our corporation?
I still feel like remote usage of information fits into the entire concept that Eve's galaxy plays into.
Easy lore reason: Giving workforce access to your hangars remotely are 99% likely to result in theft of everythign nto nailed down, while with local access it can be controlled who takes what and where. Due to the high number of thefts, Concord have passed universal laws against giving workforces remote access to anything. Took like 10sec to make up this BS, lore is just a small part tho mostly its gameplay reasons. Risk-reward is totaly screwed when you can have your BPO's safe in station and still get the benefits of a POS. Except that contracts and PI as well as buy orders and even other industry job actions can be done remotely. There is nothing that makes it, even in your 10sec lore bs, consistant with the rest of the game.
You want more plausible BS?
The blueprints aren't schematics. They're the control codes for the nanite assemblers that all our stuff is made using, embedded in cartridges. And DRM is alive and well.
That's why you can only make limited copies, and can't copy those. And why invention has a failure rate (you're breaking adaptive DRM, and when you fail, the copy burns itself out) Woo! CSM 9! http://fuzzwork.enterprises/ Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter |
Joraa Starkmanir
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
6
|
Posted - 2014.06.05 09:09:00 -
[399] - Quote
Kusum Fawn wrote:
Except that contracts and PI as well as buy orders and even other industry job actions can be done remotely. There is nothing that makes it, even in your 10sec lore bs, consistant with the rest of the game.
Contracts are agreements between 2 capsuleers, not the same as giving some low payed thief access to your corp hangar (most corps are very strict about who get that kind of access) PI, you give orders to workers on a planet to do stuff, they have no way to get of that planet with your stuff. Buy orders are like online shopping, and its limited to stations and can be controlled. Other industry, im sure your thinking about those jobs where you have materials+blueprint already stored in the same place as your trying to make something? Would you let random PLAYERS move your BPO whenever you use a POS for manufacture or research?
The changes are plausible to explain with lore, but the main reason for the changes are GAMEPLAY! Again, someone that have actualy read the eve lore and care alot about it may find other reasons than what i make up :P |
Charuati Dranor
Dark-Blades Galactic Skyfleet Empire
1
|
Posted - 2014.06.05 10:20:00 -
[400] - Quote
It is conceivable that the cargo capacity change in the corporate hangar is preferred in order to compensate for the already active change in the capitals packing size? It deprives the corporate hangar currently about 28.5% of its cargo capacity when a capital ship was stored. |
|
Karash Amerius
Sutoka
170
|
Posted - 2014.06.05 17:41:00 -
[401] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote:You want more plausible BS?
The blueprints aren't schematics. They're the control codes for the nanite assemblers that all our stuff is made using, embedded in cartridges. And DRM is alive and well.
That's why you can only make limited copies, and can't copy those. And why invention has a failure rate (you're breaking adaptive DRM, and when you fail, the copy burns itself out)
That sir, is some nicely written logic for space magic. Well done.
Being serious. Karash Amerius Operative, Sutoka |
Tia Hibra
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
4
|
Posted - 2014.06.06 23:13:00 -
[402] - Quote
Please, for the love of god, increase the size of the biochemical silos. These things are crazy small for how large fullertites can be, needing to be refilled multiple times per day (which makes a very boring and tedious task, much more so |
Tia Hibra
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
4
|
Posted - 2014.06.06 23:15:00 -
[403] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
On the bright side however, we are working on ways to remove offline Control Towers. It's still in early design and with our team bandwidth being quite full for Crius, this will have to wait after that, but it's definitely on the menu.
This is great news!!!!! |
Salpad
Carebears with Attitude
542
|
Posted - 2014.06.07 00:10:00 -
[404] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote: I can talk with Fozzie regarding CPU requirements on missile batteries when he's around.
What was the result of this talk, then? |
Vivi Udan
Multiplex Gaming The Bastion
35
|
Posted - 2014.06.09 14:04:00 -
[405] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Batelle wrote:Looks good.
Like I said at the panel, change the requirements of pos gunnery to only be anchoring 4. Quick little change.
Poses are going to proliferate quite a bit, and hopefully more people will be fighting at them. And people with less means to defend them will have need to use them where before they didn't. They are going to be less of a specialized thing and more of a necessity for industrialists. The barrier for pos gunnery could take a look at. Its a really miserable train. But it's so much work to change one number and I am so le tired! Fine, done. Starbase Defense Management only requires Anchoring 4 instead of 5 now.
I remembered to check Tranquility yesterday to see if this change was in the Kronos release...It wasn't. I assume the "5" will be changed to a "4" in the Crius release? Or is this change put on hold for some other reason? o/ The Mittani of House GoonWaffe,-áFirst of His name, King of the Goons and VFK,-áMaster of griefing,-áLord of the CFC, Warden of the West,-áand Protector of Deklein. |
TurAmarth ElRandir
H.E.L.P.e.R Astraeaus
64
|
Posted - 2014.06.11 00:30:00 -
[406] - Quote
corebloodbrothers wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote:[quote=Maxdig] On the bright side however, we are working on ways to remove offline Control Towers. It's still in early design and with our team bandwidth being quite full for Crius, this will have to wait after that, but it's definitely on the menu. Since wh is littered with offline towers, and oflines pos used to secure moons this can be a new occupation, depending on what happens to contents like hangars and pos. Scoop or destroy Cant wait! Nice interaction with ccp
I just hope that whatever mechanic is used allows for some % chance to take over (read steal) the spike, structures, stored items (% chance to drop?) and all mods. It should be more complex than jumping in an abandoned ship, however if you abandon a POS other players should be able to profit thereby.
I too cannot wait for this!!! TurAmarth ElRandir Anoikis Merc, Salvager, Logibro and Unrepentant Blogger Fly Wreckless and see you in the Sky =/|)= http://turamarths-evelife.blogspot.com/ |
TurAmarth ElRandir
H.E.L.P.e.R Astraeaus
64
|
Posted - 2014.06.11 01:52:00 -
[407] - Quote
Sigras wrote:Komi Toran wrote:My first thought on this was "Hacking!" So seconding/thirding/fourthing/whatever your linked proposal. We have a tower removal mechanic... its called war deccing.
War Decs are not a GÇÿRemovalGÇÖ mechanicGǪ they're a PvP mechanicGǪ POS Bashing, or grinding, the endless hours of POS shooting is a GÇÿRemovalGÇÖ mechanic, and Wardeccing any corp to bash an offline POS in null or W-space is really idiotic. TurAmarth ElRandir Anoikis Merc, Salvager, Logibro and Unrepentant Blogger Fly Wreckless and see you in the Sky =/|)= http://turamarths-evelife.blogspot.com/ |
Sigras
Conglomo
793
|
Posted - 2014.06.11 15:55:00 -
[408] - Quote
TurAmarth ElRandir wrote:Sigras wrote:Komi Toran wrote:My first thought on this was "Hacking!" So seconding/thirding/fourthing/whatever your linked proposal. We have a tower removal mechanic... its called war deccing. War Decs are not a GÇÿRemovalGÇÖ mechanicGǪ they're a PvP mechanicGǪ POS Bashing, or grinding, the endless hours of POS shooting is a GÇÿRemovalGÇÖ mechanic, and Wardeccing any corp to bash an offline POS in null or W-space is really idiotic. "Oh No! I actually have to do some work to get the results I want which include freeing up a moon in high sec and blowing up a 3-400 million isk asset of my enemies! Why cant CCP just let me be lazy and do it for me???!!!" |
Joraa Starkmanir
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
8
|
Posted - 2014.06.11 19:49:00 -
[409] - Quote
Sigras wrote: "Oh No! I actually have to do some work to get the results I want which include freeing up a moon in high sec and blowing up a 3-400 million isk asset of my enemies! Why cant CCP just let me be lazy and do it for me???!!!"
There is a large diffrence between CCP helping to remove towers, and CCP changing mechanics around tower removal. We have no idea what they end up doing, but killing a dickstar in highsec is far from what anyone would call fun. |
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
10
|
Posted - 2014.06.11 22:15:00 -
[410] - Quote
Joraa Starkmanir wrote:Sigras wrote: "Oh No! I actually have to do some work to get the results I want which include freeing up a moon in high sec and blowing up a 3-400 million isk asset of my enemies! Why cant CCP just let me be lazy and do it for me???!!!"
There is a large diffrence between CCP helping to remove towers, and CCP changing mechanics around tower removal. We have no idea what they end up doing, but killing a dickstar in highsec is far from what anyone would call fun.
any structure grind is far from what anyone will call fun. Watch it be a mechanic that take over a week to complete and that at any point the pos owner can scrap all the work done. |
|
NeobaramMarket
Rheinmetall AG.
0
|
Posted - 2014.06.12 07:16:00 -
[411] - Quote
how about making more line's on POS Advanced assembly module?
1,000 cpu for 1 line is non-sense.
who's going to use advanced assembly module at POS
how about make it to 3 lines? |
Joraa Starkmanir
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
8
|
Posted - 2014.06.12 07:20:00 -
[412] - Quote
NeobaramMarket wrote:how about making more line's on POS Advanced assembly module?
1,000 cpu for 1 line is non-sense.
who's going to use advanced assembly module at POS
how about make it to 3 lines?
Was sure all this line stuff was going away, only limit would be how many jobs you have skills to install. |
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
3413
|
Posted - 2014.06.12 11:38:00 -
[413] - Quote
NeobaramMarket wrote:how about making more line's on POS Advanced assembly module?
1,000 cpu for 1 line is non-sense.
who's going to use advanced assembly module at POS
how about make it to 3 lines?
Welcome to not paying attention.
There are no slots any more. Run as many jobs as you want in an array. (there are benefits to multiple arrays, reducing installation costs.) Woo! CSM 9! http://fuzzwork.enterprises/ Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter |
Sigras
Conglomo
802
|
Posted - 2014.06.13 07:02:00 -
[414] - Quote
Joraa Starkmanir wrote:Sigras wrote:"Oh No! I actually have to do some work to get the results I want which include freeing up a moon in high sec and blowing up a 3-400 million isk asset of my enemies! Why cant CCP just let me be lazy and do it for me???!!!" There is a large diffrence between CCP helping to remove towers, and CCP changing mechanics around tower removal. We have no idea what they end up doing, but killing a dickstar in highsec is far from what anyone would call fun. Thats fair, i cant criticize a mechanic that I havent observed yet... |
laura raumal
Anvil Inc. Superior Eve Engineering
0
|
Posted - 2014.06.16 02:54:00 -
[415] - Quote
Sigras wrote: "Oh No! I actually have to do some work to get the results I want which include freeing up a moon in high sec and blowing up a 3-400 million isk asset of my enemies! Why cant CCP just let me be lazy and do it for me???!!!"
Nobody is talking about the ability to take down ONLINE pos's easier. They are talking about the structures that have been sitting around forever, and take hours to kill by numerous players, all without any effort from the POS owner who could easily setup another offline tower in 30 minutes (for a large)
Most low sec moons are littered with offline towers that have been there for years.
So I would reverse what you are saying. If the owner wants to be lazy and not fuel the tower, then there should be consequences to that action. |
Katherine Raven
ALTA Industries Intergalactic Conservation Movement
152
|
Posted - 2014.06.16 16:59:00 -
[416] - Quote
Just read the new Dev Blog on all the POS changes.
I would like you to know that I plan on abusing it.
1) Offline all my defenses 2) Online max number of assembly arrays for the type of job I plan on running 3) Start the job getting max benefit, but start all jobs from the same array 4) Offline all arrays except the one I started the jobs from 5) Online all defenses leaving only the one single array online 6) Repeat for other array types at the same tower if needed (there would be no reason to ever have more than 1 tower)
While I wouldn't mind taking advantage of this and leaving my POS as a massive ball of death should anyone come looking, it would mean two things: first, looking at a POS gives you zero indication of how much isk is currently going through it's arrays, making it impossible to assess the persons activities. Second, it allows you to minimize risk while maximizing reward, which makes no sense.
It would make sense to me if any module that provided a benefit to the job was locked in the online position until the job was either finished or cancelled. This would mean you'd actually have to leave them all running while the job is running. This would let people looking in get a feel for how much you're doing in the POS, as well as forcing you to make fitting decisions on your POS. It also opens up the possibility of having multiple POS' each one dedicated to a different assembly array type. |
Katherine Raven
ALTA Industries Intergalactic Conservation Movement
152
|
Posted - 2014.06.16 17:03:00 -
[417] - Quote
laura raumal wrote:Sigras wrote: "Oh No! I actually have to do some work to get the results I want which include freeing up a moon in high sec and blowing up a 3-400 million isk asset of my enemies! Why cant CCP just let me be lazy and do it for me???!!!"
Nobody is talking about the ability to take down ONLINE pos's easier. They are talking about the structures that have been sitting around forever, and take hours to kill by numerous players, all without any effort from the POS owner who could easily setup another offline tower in 30 minutes (for a large) Most low sec moons are littered with offline towers that have been there for years. So I would reverse what you are saying. If the owner wants to be lazy and not fuel the tower, then there should be consequences to that action.
There have been suggestions as to things like being able to hack offline towers (though having it not be easy at all) or having POS' continue to burn starbase charters while they are offline and becoming suspect flagged if they ever run out. I think either of those ideas is pretty awesome. What I would hate to see is someone lose a tower to a thief because it was without fuel for 10 minutes. I also agree that there should be some way of removing towers that have been lying around forever, without forcing people who hold moons to be sold to be constantly loosing towers to thieves. |
Catherine Laartii
Providence Guard Templis CALSF
213
|
Posted - 2014.06.16 19:09:00 -
[418] - Quote
What will the advantage be about using the Hyasyoda laboratories? They NEED to have the best multiplier out of all of them by a good margin for their price tag and rarity; anything short of that would be unnecessarily devaluing them. |
Joraa Starkmanir
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
11
|
Posted - 2014.06.16 21:30:00 -
[419] - Quote
Catherine Laartii wrote:What will the advantage be about using the Hyasyoda laboratories? They NEED to have the best multiplier out of all of them by a good margin for their price tag and rarity; anything short of that would be unnecessarily devaluing them. It have the best time multiplier, how big the margin is, is realy unimportant as people easily pay a premium for the best no mather how much better it is. The amrgin actualy have to be small enought that there is a real choice to use it or not, and not be the only realistic option |
SalubriousSky Rinah
Cryptic Spear
29
|
Posted - 2014.06.17 03:31:00 -
[420] - Quote
Removing deadsticks is already possible, as stated by other posts in this thread.
To reiterate, you simply get in a big ship, load some big ammo into big guns, gather a big group of players and open fire at said big target. Then sit back on comms, ping d scan, share war stories and adult content, crack open some beer and 12 hours later watch the said POS explode.
If CCP want to make this easier for players to remove offlined towers without making it a simple 'right click on offlined tower and scoop to cargo mechanic', then why don't they just reduce the hull resists on offlined towers...instead of the bizarre 99% resists they have at the moment.
Sal |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 .. 17 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |